Do you view fighting as a competition to see who is better?

[DanP]

Good luck explaining your new black eye or missing tooth to your parents.

If you are lucky, your old man will just teach you how to fight and some basic psychology of the street fight.

Sometimes you have to stand and face it. Best not to lose, and best to decisively defeat your assailant - especially with lots of witnesses.

Like I said, if its inevitable, give them hell. It's not an eye for an eye, it's two eyes for one.
When others know you are a menace willing to break their bones, they'll think twice before attacking you again. Most of them at least, a minority won't be impressed. In my neighborhood the ppl determined to fight knew a very basic truth of fighting, that there is no magic bullet against multiple opponents :P (unless you are attacked by sheep) So if they really wanted to get you, they wouldn't care how though you are, they would simply gang you up on street after you got out of a club. Knowing ppl was useful.

However, I would still advise anyone who asks me about street fighting to run if you have the option. Unfortunately, I had an acquittance who was killed in a street fight (killer was apprehended), and one who was so badly beaten that he required brain surgery and he has sequels for life. The police never found who did him.

By the time I was in my teens, older kids knew not to screw with me, but new kids in town didn't.

It usually works that way. By the time the winter holiday in my 9th grade came, everybody in the school knew who you can mess with and with who you could not. There where some rare upsets, but for the better part of the next 4 years till HS ended everybody knew his place.

 

[mathwonk]

If you have only defended yourself in school, fighting may seem cool or necessary, but it really is something to learn to avoid. you never know who that stranger is. Again at the risk of repeating my favorite stories, before i completely got religion, for 2 years I took a job as a meat lugger in South Boston, unloading 400 pieces of meat, each weighing around 175 pounds and up per day. The heaviest piece of meat I ever held and moved briefly weighed 305 lbs. In those days I could lift a 250 lb man off his feet and carry him. I also kept a meat hook in my belt loop.

I also had long hippie hair and one day I felt ornery and put a rose behind my ear and went walking, looking for trouble. A couple of construction workers up on a ladder took the bait and one said: " hey somebody grab that hippie and give him a big kiss". I said: "come on down, you might catch a surprise." They did not come down.

that also taught me a lesson. Fighting is often about insecurity. My job and the strength it gave me made me so confident I exuded an aura that said it would be unwise to attack me.

the other guys on my job were far tougher than I. Most had done time, and went in and out of jail regularly. I occasionally gave guys a ride to the hospital to visit friends who "argued with knives and lost". We lost one man each year I was there to homicide. One of our smaller guys, weighed 165 pounds soaking wet, could out lug every one of us, was a karate expert and an accurate knife thrower. He once carried a 365 pound fore quarter out of a railroad car on his shoulder alone. One night he was murdered in his sleep. In those days I had no physical fear of anyone, foolishly of course. Even the toughest guys warned me how helpless I would be if I went to prison.

My dad also carried a gun everyday of his life, slept with two of them, and had shot a man in a gun battle in his youth. We had a shooting range in our basement and at the age of 10, I could disassemble a 45 automatic pistol and switch out the barrel for a 22 blindfolded. My dad also owned what would technically be considered a sawed off shotgun, subsequently outlawed.

You absolutely never know who you are challenging if you provoke a fight, nor what they are prepared to do.

As I became more enlightened I learned not even to be in the vicinity of place where a fight might arise, and to live in a peaceful environment at all times, or as much as possible.

 

[DanP]

If you have only defended yourself in school, fighting may seem cool or necessary, but it really is something to learn to avoid.

I agree. With the risk to repet myself for the 3rd time, if you have the option to get away safely, doit. If you can't get away from it, your first concern should be to **avoid** going hand to hand against anyone and use a weapon. Hand to Hand should be only a last resort option, and anyone would be well advised if during any phase of the fight an opportunity to safely clear the scene arises, just take the it.

You absolutely never know who you are challenging if you provoke a fight

Nor who attacks you. Nor what weapons they carry.

...nor what they are prepared to do

Remember Ryan Gracie ? One of the more volatile members of the Gracie family. That guy had a 2nd degr black belt in BJJ and world class expertise in Vale Tudo fights. Well, when he got in an altercation in a club, he used a knife and stabbed his opponent. Simple, efficent, why even bother to use a submission to subdue and potentially fall prey to your opponent knife ? Later, in 2007 he stole a car, and again used a knife. He injured a 76 years old man with it, according to Brazilian newspapers. So yeah, if someone with world class expertise in fighting is prepared to use a knife ...

Some ppl are prepared to do very bad things to you. It's a lottery. Many will argue that meeting a psycho willing to maim or kill you is a small chance. That you will fight against street loosers who can only throw haymakers at you. It ain't so. I say it very much depends of where you are and with who you are. Don't make such bets with luck.

 

[nismaratwork]

If you are lucky, your old man will just teach you how to fight and some basic psychology of the street fight.



Like I said, if its inevitable, give them hell. It's not an eye for an eye, it's two eyes for one.
When others know you are a menace willing to break their bones, they'll think twice before attacking you again. Most of them at least, a minority won't be impressed. In my neighborhood the ppl determined to fight knew a very basic truth of fighting, that there is no magic bullet against multiple opponents :P (unless you are attacked by sheep) So if they really wanted to get you, they wouldn't care how though you are, they would simply gang you up on street after you got out of a club. Knowing ppl was useful.

However, I would still advise anyone who asks me about street fighting to run if you have the option. Unfortunately, I had an acquittance who was killed in a street fight (killer was apprehended), and one who was so badly beaten that he required brain surgery and he has sequels for life. The police never found who did him.



It usually works that way. By the time the winter holiday in my 9th grade came, everybody in the school knew who you can mess with and with who you could not. There where some rare upsets, but for the better part of the next 4 years till HS ended everybody knew his place.

I think this is where people who have experience with firearms have an advantage in their thinking. Your attitude, that basic psychology you mention, I know it's not just posturing or "cute"... it's quite necessary. With a gun, people are taught: draw when you mean to shoot ONLY, aim only at what you are prepared to destroy. A knife is pretty self-explanatory in terms of its risks, but fists and the environment often do NOT come with a guide.

Like any other escalation to violence, it is inherently unpredictable and therefore, "on" and "off" your SD training should be IT. As you say, it's not about reciprocal justice, but staying alive and minimizing harm done to yourself. All other good options do NOT involve fighting. It's cheering to see someone I often disagree with take such an enlightened view, and I wanted to acknowledge that.

Mathwonk: I often carry a sidearm, and as you say the reality of life is that you just hope to do everything short of drawing it. That being said, your point about insecurity has a flipside:

DanP pointed out the "Everyone knew their place" in HS, and I had the same experience. I've had one fight in a school in my life, and I didn't start it... a really mentally disturbed kid started by whacking me in the face with his trombone case. I had never fought before, and I was MUCH bigger than him, so I just whacked him with my backpack (very young remember) until he calmed down.

In HS, I was a big guy, but not the biggest or strongest. Beyond that, we all knew who those guys were who would SNAP... because big, small, strong, weak... nobody wants a piece of the unpredictability of "crazy". There is an element of comfort in not NEEDING or wanting to fight, but some people seem to need that implied structure DanP refers to. In the context of other animals, the most efficient means to "fight" is just what you describe: make a display to set yourself apart and when confronted in a ritualistic manner, overcome. You only run into trouble with that if someone feels cornered for whatever reason, and then we go back to running.

edit: Danp: Don't bet with luck... I like that. I think that's why most reasonable people who are concerned for that carry a sidearm, myself included. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst, and always tap your magazine. I'll run anytime, but just as it's been said... I'm not going to outrun any of the Gracies!

 

[mathwonk]

good point nismarat. i am addressing only the title topic: fighting to prove you are "better" than someone else. this is a sure sign of insecurity, and i have certainly suffered from it. defending yourself is another matter. i am just saying if you restrict your fighting strictly to self defense, avoiding macho posturing, most of us will have extremely few fights.

 

[nismaratwork]

good point nismarat. i am addressing only the title topic: fighting to prove you are "better" than someone else. this is a sure sign of insecurity, and i have certainly suffered from it. defending yourself is another matter. i am just saying if you restrict your fighting strictly to self defense, avoiding macho posturing, most of us will have extremely few fights.

Agreed 100%

 

[DanP]

good point nismarat. i am addressing only the title topic: fighting to prove you are "better" than someone else. this is a sure sign of insecurity, and i have certainly suffered from it. defending yourself is another matter. i am just saying if you restrict your fighting strictly to self defense, avoiding macho posturing, most of us will have extremely few fights.

Causes of aggression and all components which may modulate an aggressive behavior are too complex to be reduced to "insecurity".

A big part of the aggressive acts which do happen are of instrumental nature. The purpose of those behaviours is not to harm another persons, it is to secure another important goal. Agression in those cases is just a mean to an end, not an end in itself.

And aggression is not always physical. Nowadays in our society due to the social constrains, aggression is most of the time expressed verbally and sometimes indirectly. Because you can get away easier with it than with physical aggression. But for me, there aint such a great difference between the two. Pummeling someone psychologically is sometimes as effective as physical aggression in producing pain. And you see this done in our society sometimes. In various places. In most cases the purpose of this kind of aggression is instrumental. It has nothing to do with simple "insecurities"

But this is going away from the purpose of the thread.

 

[nismaratwork]

Causes of aggression and all components which may modulate an aggressive behavior are too complex to be reduced to "insecurity".

A big part of the aggressive acts which do happen are of instrumental nature. The purpose of those behaviours is not to harm another persons, it is to secure another important goal. Agression in those cases is just a mean to an end, not an end in itself.

And aggression is not always physical. Nowadays in our society due to the social constrains, aggression is most of the time expressed verbally and sometimes indirectly. Because you can get away easier with it than with physical aggression. But for me, there aint such a great difference between the two. Pummeling someone psychologically is sometimes as effective as physical aggression in producing pain. And you see this done in our society sometimes. In various places. In most cases the purpose of this kind of aggression is instrumental. It has nothing to do with simple "insecurities"

But this is going away from the purpose of the thread.

Is it?... You've made me re-think that 100%, although I'd say that a lot of that agression is based in a sense of insecurity.

Maybe... add, "unsure of social/physical hierarchy"... some people aren't comfortable unless they know they can kick someone's butt, or visa versa. The psychology of the fight seems cenral to the thread... if you have more, and it's cool with the mentors... could you elaborate?

 

[DanP]

Maybe... add, "unsure of social/physical hierarchy"... some people aren't comfortable unless they know they can kick someone's butt, or visa versa.

True, but it doesn't come necessarily from an insecurity. Some ppl arent comfortable either if they don't know they can beat someone in a chess game, or get a better grade at school, or play violin better than others, whatever. It is not always the result of insecurity. While those are wildly different behaviors (fighting and chess playing ) the need to know you are better than another one is rooted in status seeking strategies. In the need of humans to place themselves in a high place in at least one of the many different social hierarchies offered by the very complex social organization we have.

The psychology of the fight seems cenral to the thread... if you have more, and it's cool with the mentors... could you elaborate?

Yes. One of the most common causes of aggression is pain. Take any mammal and cause him enough pain and you will get an aggressive response from him. Humans make no exception. But our social organization complicates things. For humans, pain can embrace social forms too. Social pain caused by various social conditions and social stressors can easily generate aggressive behaviors. And because you can't take it off on "society", it often results in displacement aggression. You will direct the aggressive behavior on someone else. This can take a multitude of forms, ranging from indirect and verbal aggression at work or at home, bullying someone , or downright look for a fight. IMO this is one of the leading causes for the hostile aggression (not instrumental one ) you see in the streets.

 

[nismaratwork]

True, but it doesn't come necessarily from an insecurity. Some ppl arent comfortable either if they don't know they can beat someone in a chess game, or get a better grade at school, or play violin better than others, whatever. It is not always the result of insecurity. While those are wildly different behaviors (fighting and chess playing ) the need to know you are better than another one is rooted in status seeking strategies. In the need of humans to place themselves in a high place in at least one of the many different social hierarchies offered by the very complex social organization we have.

True, although I would say that the mechanism used to induce that behavior is a sense of unease or insecurity. It hopefully evolves in time to be a simple contest, but I look at a sense of insecurity like Dopamine... juts the spur that drives us to the behaviours you described. Not the only one, but it's a strong one; it's a terrible feeling to be out of place or uncertain.

Then agian, you have ritual hazing, and that's a perfect model of the social-acceptance/hierarchy you're talking about.

Yes. One of the most common causes of aggression is pain. Take any mammal and cause him enough pain and you will get an aggressive response from him. Humans make no exception.

True, and I assume the implication that flight is not an option. I'd add, it's not just mammals... reptiles are a fine example of this behavior. Leave them be, and the vast majority of them leave you be. Step on one, or just confuse it and you end up on the sharp end of something. I'd add: protecting its young... from crocodilian chirping for "mom", to a human cry... nothing will turn someone vicious more than protecting their child.

But our social organization complicates things. For humans, pain can embrace social forms too. Social pain caused by various social conditions and social stressors can easily generate aggressive behaviors. And because you can't take it off on "society", it often results in displacement aggression. You will direct the aggressive behavior on someone else. This can take a multitude of forms, ranging from indirect and verbal aggression at work or at home, bullying someone , or downright look for a fight. IMO this is one of the leading causes for the hostile aggression (not instrumental one ) you see in the streets.

True, and this is generally the kind of "bar fight" that emerges once alcohol lowers inhibitions.

 

[DanP]

True, although I would say that the mechanism used to induce that behavior is a sense of unease or insecurity.

Perhaps state anxiety would describe it better then. If you refer to insecurities as colloquial I usually understand from it cognitive anxiety. And surely cognitive anxiety can generate such behaviors. Because worrying too much or harboring too many negative thoughts is IMO a stressor which results in pain.

But in the behaviors I mention there needs not to exist any cognitive anxiety. That's it, you function perfectly cognitively, you are not worried of elusive negative thoughts or other chimeras.

State anxiety does exist, but is not IMO the generator of the behavior. State anxiety is temporary, ever-changing emotional state , which is associated with the degree of activation of the autonomic nervous system. Rather than generating the behavior, the modulations in state anxiety are the result of the behavior and of the interaction of the with the environment. IMO, there is no need for any cognitive anxiety to exist for a person to exhibit status seeking behaviors. And perhaps state anxiety is also a important adaptive signal. High state anxiety is there to tell you to cease to exhibit a non-adaptive behavior and re-evaluate the situation.

Of course, trait anxiety also plays a big role. If your personality structure has high trait anxiety, you will be more likely to perceive normal situations, which are not actually dangerous from physical or psychological point of view as threatening. So its pretty clear that is an important factor in the modulation of the behavior.

It hopefully evolves in time to be a simple contest

As I said, I don't think there is a very high difference between wanting to smash someone's face or wanting to utterly destroy him in a chess game. The difference resides perhaps in more developed PFC, which allows you to express the hostile intent in a social accepted way. Harboring any of those two desires it's still about aggression IMO. About being the better one. But it is displayed differently.

Then agian, you have ritual hazing, and that's a perfect model of the social-acceptance/hierarchy you're talking about.

This is indeed one phenomena which can be explained through cognitive dissonance theory (and implicitly, the part of the dopaminergic system which deals with reward. ), but it is not one related to status seeking. It just explains why ppl which went through a hazing feel such strong ties to the group which whey where allowed to join.

 

[nismaratwork]

Perhaps state anxiety would describe it better then. If you refer to insecurities as colloquial I usually understand from it cognitive anxiety. And surely cognitive anxiety can generate such behaviors. Because worrying too much or too harbouring many negative thoughts is IMO a stressor which results in pain.

But in the behaviors I mention there needs not to exist any cognitive anxiety. That's it, you function perfectly cognitively, you are not worried of elusive negative thoughts or other chimeras.

State anxiety does exist, but is not IMO the generator of the behavior. State anxiety is temporary, ever-changing emotional state , which is associated with the degree of activation of the autonomic nervous system. Rather than generating the behavior, the modulations in state anxiety are the result of the behavior and of the interaction of the with the environment. IMO, there is no need for any cognitive anxiety to exist for a person to exhibit status seeking behaviors.

Of course, trait anxiety also plays a big role. If your personality structure has high trait anxiety, you will be more likely to perceive normal situations, which are not actually dangerous from physical or psychological point of view as threatening. So its pretty clear that is an important factor in the modulation of the behavior.

The anxiety may be relatively fleeting, but it leaves insecurity in its wake. In general, anxiety of ANY kind isn't really an emotional state, but a state of "fight or flight". By definition, anxiety can always turn on a dime, and if you add alcohol you get some fairly ridiculous fights. Is it necessary?... No.

To me this is right up there with nature/nurture... I don't disagree with you, yet people add such an odd set of variables to the mix. To be clear, I'm obviously excepting those with various executive function deficits. I think one of the major factors in violent escalation is a simple lack of awareness of potential consequence, or an emotional state which impairs that analysis. On the other hand... trait anxiety... fair enough that, and arguably an adaptation.

This is indeed one phenomena which can be explained through cognitive dissonance theory (and implicitly, the part of the dopaminergic system which deals with reward. ), but it is not one related to status seeking. It just explains why ppl which went through a hazing feel such strong ties to the group which whey where allowed to join.

It does, but it also sets a standard of commitment which you have to have to form those bonds. It's a short and rough manner of weeding out, "non-hackers". Certainly it also forms ties, but generally as part of a "back story" created to resolve the cognitive dissonance. You either commit, or retreat... then you stick with what you "chose", and the pain adds perceived value through the mechanism you describe.

I'd add... it may not be popular, but there is clearly a strong "nature" end to this, and while profound it's unclear just how the "nurture" end works. Then of course, there is calculated aggression as a means of taking territory and general intimidation along the "gang war" model. This is closely associated with cycles of reciprocal violence and a heightened social tension that both alerts to potential conflict, and escalates it rapidly.

Finally... guns, knives, sticks... the first time a weapon came into play, the game changed. A small skilled knife-fighter of any gender can take your liver before you know what's happening. How we as people react to this, hmmm... let's call it a "spontaneous social symmetry breaking"... the Higgs Effect of aggression. Now in the age of projectile weapons, there is a kind of added mass to any conflict because the possibility of decisive and lethal force is always possible. I'm not just talking about guns... a brief examination of the history of the crossbow for instance shows the fear and outrage among a previously "invulnerable" class.

 

[Containment]

To me it's about restraint because fights aren't always over after the fight ends. If you do fight someone and use dirty methods you may "win the battle" however if you run into that person again you may "lose the war". I personally don't defend my self in fights as the person fighting you is almost always not out to kill you or other wise they would have came up from behind and just stabbed you or something. What's the point of fighting the person if it's just going to make them more angry and possibly get you in trouble with the law ect? I mean sure there are times where I might defend my self but in general I think it will work out better long term not to. If you take any respectable type of karate they will teach you that fighting is a no win situation and you should always avoid it. Also I think most people give up fighting you fast if you show that your not afraid to die right then and there as most of the fighting is just about getting a jolly out of it and you don't get joy from beating something that is easy to beat.

 

[nismaratwork]

To me it's about restraint because fights aren't always over after the fight ends. If you do fight someone and use dirty methods you may "win the battle" however if you run into that person again you may "lose the war". I personally don't defend my self in fights as the person fighting you is almost always not out to kill you or other wise they would have came up from behind and just stabbed you or something. What's the point of fighting the person if it's just going to make them more angry and possibly get you in trouble with the law ect? I mean sure there are times where I might defend my self but in general I think it will work out better long term not to. If you take any respectable type of karate they will teach you that fighting is a no win situation and you should always avoid it. Also I think most people give up fighting you fast if you show that your not afraid to die right then and there as most of the fighting is just about getting a jolly out of it and you don't get joy from beating something that is easy to beat.

Hmmm, well I'm afraid to die! I think that would encapsulate the totality of my feelings on the subject.

 

[Containment]

Well I didn't say you had to not be afraid to die just show it lol :) You ever see animals play dead before?

Actually that wouldn't be that bad of a study idea I'd like to see how often playing dead pays off vs trying to run for a rabbit or what ever.

 

[nismaratwork]

Well I didn't say you had to not be afraid to die just show it lol :) You ever see animals play dead before?

Sure, but sometimes that ends badly too!

I like to take it by training: react if you must, run if you can, and beyond that there is no such thing as pride in a true fight. If playing possum works... more power to you.

 

[DanP]

To me it's about restraint because fights aren't always over after the fight ends. If you do fight someone and use dirty methods you may "win the battle" however if you run into that person again you may "lose the war". I personally don't defend my self in fights as the person fighting you is almost always not out to kill you or other wise they would have came up from behind and just stabbed you or something. What's the point of fighting the person if it's just going to make them more angry and possibly get you in trouble with the law ect?

This is fear, not restraint. It;s a reason as good as any other to not fight, but you must not misinterpret it as restraint.

Also I think most people give up fighting you fast if you show that your not afraid to die right then and there as most of the fighting is just about getting a jolly out of it and you don't get joy from beating something that is easy to beat.

Only that it doesn't work that way. Humans prefer to beat targets which are easy to beat or prey upon. Targets of physical violence , bullying, rape (or conn actions for that matter) are usually selected for from categories of persons which are least likely to represent a real threat to the attacker. That's it, easy targets. Some humans are very good at selecting least dangerous opponents. Uncannily so. It works the same way like when you see a women and in several seconds you decide she is hot or not. You just sit and look at the flow of pedestrians, and you will just know who is more likely to be a victim. It doesn't take more than seconds of observation. We are very good at this. In this case, reading a book by its cover works. The process is surprisingly accurate. And agression is not about "jolly". Its mainly about emotive responses to stressors, domination and instrumental goals.

But despite the accuracy of this process, you may be in for a surprise some times.

And the statement "your not afraid to die" is a bit melodramatic. Youll **** your pants if it comes to that. And to be honest, it takes much less than a life threat to make an average person be very afraid.

 

[nismaratwork]

This is fear, not restraint. It;s a reason as good as any other to not fight, but you must not misinterpret it as restraint.



Only that it doesn't work that way. Humans prefer to beat targets which are easy to beat or prey upon. Targets of physical violence , bullying, rape (or conn actions for that matter) are usually selected for from categories of persons which are least likely to represent a real threat to the attacker. That's it, easy targets. Some humans are very good at selecting least dangerous opponents. Uncannily so. It works the same way like when you see a women and in several seconds you decide she is hot or not. You just sit and look at the flow of pedestrians, and you will just know who is more likely to be a victim. It doesn't take more than seconds of observation. We are very good at this. In this case, reading a book by its cover works. The process is surprisingly accurate.


And agression is not about "jolly". Its mainly about emotive responses to stressors, domination and instrumental goals.

But despite the accuracy of this process, you may be in for a surprise some times.

And the statement "your not afraid to die" is a bit melodramatic. Youll **** your pants if it comes to that. And to be honest, it takes much less than a life threat to make an average person be very afraid.

Your point about victimization is probably no more evident than in children, and I'm not talking about sexual abuse. For all that people purport to love them, they make such easy victims of neglect, casual stupidity, cruelty, etc. It's quite ugly, and the other end of that spectrum is elder abuse, and the abuse of the mentally disabled.

Predators never change at their core, fortunately methods of detecting them DO.

 

[Containment]

Only that it doesn't work that way. Humans prefer to beat targets which are easy to beat or prey upon. Targets of physical violence , bullying, rape (or conn actions for that matter) are usually selected for from categories of persons which are least likely to represent a real threat to the attacker. That's it, easy targets. Some humans are very good at selecting least dangerous opponents. Uncannily so. It works the same way like when you see a women and in several seconds you decide she is hot or not. You just sit and look at the flow of pedestrians, and you will just know who is more likely to be a victim. It doesn't take more than seconds of observation. We are very good at this. In this case, reading a book by its cover works. The process is surprisingly accurate. And agression is not about "jolly". Its mainly about emotive responses to stressors, domination and instrumental goals.

But despite the accuracy of this process, you may be in for a surprise some times.

And the statement "your not afraid to die" is a bit melodramatic. Youll **** your pants if it comes to that. And to be honest, it takes much less than a life threat to make an average person be very afraid.

While I do agree bullies will generally pick on someone who is not there size they are generally looking to engage in an actual fight. They really do want you to fight back as I remember in school the bullies I dealt with almost always wanted you to throw the first punch so they could justify to others that they where defending them selfs. Even if you didn't attack them after being hit a few times they would still claim that you hit them first and started the fight. They generally do not keep punching you if you don't fight back from my experience in school. Also if you get to know some of the types that are bullies they are generally just taking frustration out on others from the type of stuff they have to deal with at home like being beat / neglected by parents in my experience. Like one guy I knew that actually stabbed me with a pencil in class I later got to know a bit better and found out about some fairly insane stuff his parents did to him.

 

[mathwonk]

I began by wanting to be the toughest guy around. Then eventually i became envious of the man who never has to fight. Read I. Samuel, 19, the verse beginning with the 18th, for a description of that ideal. See an account of a man (Samuel) so much in tune with himself and the world that anyone who comes near him, no matter how violent is his intent, loses all ability to do harm. David, the greatest warrior of his time, fled from King Saul, and encamped with Samuel. Saul sent men to take him three times and finally went himself. All to no avail, for when entering the vicinity of Samuel's camp, every man he sent began to worship and prophesy. Think about that level of existence. How can you get there?

 

[mathwonk]

On the subject of dying, it reminds me of my political action days. At the height of the Vietnam war I turned in my draft card, which was a deferred one by the way, hence giving up my deferment, and dared them to draft me. When they did so rather soon, I refused the draft and began to prepare for prison or worse.

I had been afraid for a long time to express my views and then I asked myself what could happen? I decided the worst they could do was kill me, so I decided if I wanted to feel free, I needed to be willing to die for my beliefs, so I decided not to let that stop me.

This is a very dangerous position to hold. At this point you have absolutely no fear of anyone, and you begin to do whatever seems right to you. I started objecting to all kinds of wrong behavior even by the police, interfering when they abused street people for instance, and I began getting arrested regularly and beaten up by them and jailed.

The only good that came of that was one night comforting a younger kid who was afraid being in jail would keep him out of the marines. I was pretty sure that was not an obstacle and told him so. After a while though I got really tired of being beaten and arrested and began to slack off. But it took a while.

Once I went to the police station to complain about something, got some grief and told the officer on duty to **** himself and stalked out with him hollering "come back here" I don't recommend any of this, and am only telling it now because I am pretty sure they do not know where I am now 40 years later.

Is anyone sorry they missed the 60's? Let me tell you, you are not. I lost 10 years of my productive life fighting the Nixon administration, the institution of racism, ...as Brando said: "I could have been a contendah". ... Fighting is lost time for working and creating, and it can end all chance of those. If I didn't have friends to bring me home, I might have been left on the street one of those nights in 1968.

 

[DanP]

See an account of a man (Samuel) so much in tune with himself and the world that anyone who comes near him, no matter how violent is his intent, loses all ability to do harm. David, the greatest warrior of his time, fled from King Saul, and encamped with Samuel. Saul sent men to take him three times and finally went himself. All to no avail, for when entering the vicinity of Samuel's camp, every man he sent began to worship and prophesy.
Think about that level of existence. How can you get there?

You simply won't get there. You will not even get close. Not by a million light years.

 

[nismaratwork]

You simply won't get there. You will not even get close. Not by a million light years.

Yeah... I'd have to agree. I can see the value in wanting to emulate characterstics of heroic figures, but we don't live in a heroic age. I'd also add that there is such a thing as a PARABLE.

 

[mathwonk]

You are right of course Dan and Nismarat, but once it occurs to you, I guarantee you that you can begin to make progress you would have never thought possible, if only for a few moments now and then.

Unfortunately i am not a qualified teacher, but as an example I would suggest trying the exercise of trying to endure an insult without becoming angry. Try to see the other man as like oneself, who is searching...

Forgive me for these suggestions as you probably understand more than I.

 

[Loren Booda]

This is a very dangerous position to hold. At this point you have absolutely no fear of anyone, and you begin to do whatever seems right to you. I started objecting to all kinds of wrong behavior even by the police, interfering when they abused street people for instance, and I began getting arrested regularly and beaten up by them and jailed.

Sounds like Martin Luther King Jr. when he resolved to die for right.

 

[nismaratwork]

Sounds like Martin Luther King Jr. when he resolved to die for right.

Unfortunately it also sounds like everyone else who dies for the same cause, but doesn't achieve their ends. It's a terrible risk, and in the context of fighting in this thread, I think it's unwise.